donbadman
Sep 6, 05:50 AM
The layout for the mini page on the uk store is different to usa with lots of white space on the right hand side, might be a new model?
kepner
Mar 31, 02:13 AM
Launchpad is now an app in the Applications folder, and can be removed from the Dock.
Is frontrow back?
No, and they removed the mention of it from the Sound prefpane. ("Play Front Row sound effects")
Is frontrow back?
No, and they removed the mention of it from the Sound prefpane. ("Play Front Row sound effects")
lifeinhd
Feb 27, 09:43 AM
I recall paying the same price for mine as the Mac Pro currently costs. Sheesh! Stupid me. I should've put that money into Apple stock! If I had put the $7k I blew on my Dual 800/22" into Apple shares I could afford a Ferrari right now :(
Being 14 and stupid FTW?
My parents would've shot me if I'd tried to drop that much $$$ on a computer when I was 14.
As it was, my dad was a little bothered I spent $1400 on a year-old MBP in 2008. But that was when the base MBP was $2k, so it was actually a really good deal :D
And then that Tuesday, the new models came out :p
Being 14 and stupid FTW?
My parents would've shot me if I'd tried to drop that much $$$ on a computer when I was 14.
As it was, my dad was a little bothered I spent $1400 on a year-old MBP in 2008. But that was when the base MBP was $2k, so it was actually a really good deal :D
And then that Tuesday, the new models came out :p
Daveismoney
Feb 26, 10:16 AM
http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/68/csb1.jpg
lmao
lmao
jonnysods
Apr 19, 07:43 PM
Very cool. We love our iMac 2010 i3 27" still, but I love to see this model grow and mature and get desktop components.
Couple more years!
Couple more years!
haysoos123
Apr 13, 02:07 AM
+1 here. Every time I've tried to use iMovie for a "quick" edit it always ends in disasters like this. In my case, I was trying to move some music around and time my edits with the music. It was really infuriating trying to do this in iMovie compared to how fast I could have done it in FCP. I guess we'll have wait till Apple posts more info or we get it in our hands to really tell if it can be run like the current FCP.
True, but why try to use iMovie for a quick edit in the first place? It's not really made for you, and its basic workflow is certainly not made for you. You should use what you can use, even for your home movies. Just because FCP is more advanced doesn't mean you can't also use it for very simple things.
Count me as excited for this release. As far as I know, they haven't said they would remove key features, but these updates to 64-bit and core usage enhancements have been overdue. For all you guys claiming it's "not pro" ... have you used it? How do you know that from these few details?
We don't know anything about the Suite offerings, so any bitching on that front is premature. I hope they keep Color and make a great update to Motion. The smoother color controls inside FCP will be a boon for basic things... like you need it to look presentable for cut reviews. Color is great to have around for the integrated post houses and for indies, but we have to remember that FCP is an editing program first and foremost. I will continue to take my bigger projects in for color timing on daVincis with great colorists. But for my lower-budget stuff where that's not in the cards, I hope they throw us a bone.
True, but why try to use iMovie for a quick edit in the first place? It's not really made for you, and its basic workflow is certainly not made for you. You should use what you can use, even for your home movies. Just because FCP is more advanced doesn't mean you can't also use it for very simple things.
Count me as excited for this release. As far as I know, they haven't said they would remove key features, but these updates to 64-bit and core usage enhancements have been overdue. For all you guys claiming it's "not pro" ... have you used it? How do you know that from these few details?
We don't know anything about the Suite offerings, so any bitching on that front is premature. I hope they keep Color and make a great update to Motion. The smoother color controls inside FCP will be a boon for basic things... like you need it to look presentable for cut reviews. Color is great to have around for the integrated post houses and for indies, but we have to remember that FCP is an editing program first and foremost. I will continue to take my bigger projects in for color timing on daVincis with great colorists. But for my lower-budget stuff where that's not in the cards, I hope they throw us a bone.
slackpacker
Apr 13, 05:42 AM
Holy smoke what is with all the bitching in this thread?
Final Cut X is coming! It seems to have all the stuff i'm dying for.. maybe even CUDA support!
I'm sure it all done in Open CL and not CUDA. CUDA would only support a fraction of the users out there since all new Apple Laptops use AMD (ATI)
Final Cut X is coming! It seems to have all the stuff i'm dying for.. maybe even CUDA support!
I'm sure it all done in Open CL and not CUDA. CUDA would only support a fraction of the users out there since all new Apple Laptops use AMD (ATI)
PBF
Mar 30, 09:30 PM
Ah, I see. Thanks, guys.
By the way, when re-arranging Launchpad, creating folders, deleting, moving icons around, etc., does the order stay the same after restart? In DP1, it resets to default layout. Ta.
By the way, when re-arranging Launchpad, creating folders, deleting, moving icons around, etc., does the order stay the same after restart? In DP1, it resets to default layout. Ta.
Bengt77
Aug 25, 04:22 PM
Conroe iMac would be an imediate purchase from me.
Bingo! Bring on the iMac Ultra with Conroe, 23" display and a powerful GPU. Now that would be an immediate purchase for me.
Bingo! Bring on the iMac Ultra with Conroe, 23" display and a powerful GPU. Now that would be an immediate purchase for me.
pyramid6
Apr 26, 02:28 PM
...
The store is called the App Store. You can't copy someones store name.
...
Yes you can, that's why you trademark your name. If it is trademarked you cannot copy someones name. If it is not, you can. Doesn't make it right, but that is the way it works.
The store is called the App Store. You can't copy someones store name.
...
Yes you can, that's why you trademark your name. If it is trademarked you cannot copy someones name. If it is not, you can. Doesn't make it right, but that is the way it works.
ipadder
Oct 9, 06:29 PM
The hexgrip cases look slick. http://stores.ebay.com/Cimo-Cases/Soft-Gel-Cases-/_i.html?_fsub=2283659015&_sid=192097565&_trksid=p4634.c0.m322 i like the material as well.
Spoony
Apr 26, 02:33 PM
This has nothing to do with the current case.
If you read below i said it had nothing to do with the current case but made me think of it.
If you read below i said it had nothing to do with the current case but made me think of it.
qualleyiv
Nov 15, 10:30 AM
That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
OK, I'm hardly a programmer (PHP doesn't really count) but that's the exact same description that I've heard applied to the description of what it takes to vectorize a program (i.e. make it Alti-Vec optimized) [that and the process of making loops that can be unrolled]. So I've got to ask, is there some difference between those two concepts? If not, it sure seems like we would have a lot more multi-core enabled apps out there already...
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
OK, I'm hardly a programmer (PHP doesn't really count) but that's the exact same description that I've heard applied to the description of what it takes to vectorize a program (i.e. make it Alti-Vec optimized) [that and the process of making loops that can be unrolled]. So I've got to ask, is there some difference between those two concepts? If not, it sure seems like we would have a lot more multi-core enabled apps out there already...
iGav
Mar 7, 03:05 PM
It certainly could be significantly higher. Public taste, laziness on the part of manufacturers and other things have all conspired to keep the bar set low on fuel economy.
I think that's probably accurate, general apathy on all sides really isn't it.
By way of a postscript, it's worth pointing out that today's safety and environmental regulations make it more difficult to make a car frugal, small and light than it was when Alec Issigonis designed the Mini.
Indeed, I think you've also inadvertently described the perfect engineering challenge that todays manufacturers really should be embracing, but instead seem so reticent to take up. The most remarkable thing about the original Mini, wasn't its size, it wasn't its cost� it was the whole. And in that respect alone, I cannot think of one car today that is really in anyway comparable whatsoever.
True, and that's a shame, because brand image often matters than a car's actual merits. If the new Jetta is a turd, people will still buy it because the VW badge has cachet here that GM does not, at least in the realm of small cars.
It's entirely possible to turn a brand around of course, as VW demonstrated with �koda, it's only 15 years ago that �koda was still the punchline to almost every joke.
The problem is Chevrolet is in a somewhat unique position in many respects here, it's a known brand, but by name only, usually as the carrier of good ol' boys... to a levy of course, when I think of a Chevy it's either something bright pink, with chrome� lots of chrome, or a pickup truck, not the rebadging of dreadful Daewoo cars. I suspect I'm not alone on that one.
And therein lies the problem. That and the Spark of course.
I'm not going to stand up too much for GM, I've never held a high opinion of most of their products, but I have reasonably read good reviews of the Cruze and I hope they bring the diesel here.
The Cruze is entirely inoffensive, and does the job entirely adequately by all accounts, as it should, after all it does have 4 wheels and an engine. Autocar likened it to the old Mk2 Seat Toledo saloon, and that's probably an apt comparison. Vanilla. Much like the rest of Vauxhall/Opel/Holden/Buick ranges etc actually. And that is a big problem for GM. A very big problem. One that almost sank the ship in the first place in fact. The captain might be different, but there's still no one at the helm.
the Daewoo -> Chevrolet re-branding in europe has been more or less the best business move GM has made perhaps in the last decade
Doesn't say much really does it. ;)
I think you highlight the real issue in the rest of your post. But it doesn't just affect Opel. And that is perhaps GM's biggest problem of all.
which is in a contrast to the japanese/korean brands which in europe over the last few years streamlined a lot: nearly all brands stopped offering premium sedans or upper market offerings and rather concentrated on SUVs/ crossovers and small offroaders and small minivans, compacts or small hatchbacks
It's not really streamlining when you have something like 6 suv/off-roaders in your range a'la Nissan is it? ;)
GM is doing reasonably well in Asia, and they have placed much of their small-car design duties into the capable hands of the Koreans - a wise move in my opinion.
Not if the Spark is anything to go by. Fortunately as the i10 proves, being Korean isn't the problem. ;)
I think blame can be put on both sides.
Yeah, but mainly GM for getting themselves into such a god almighty mess in the first place. ;)
The Buick Regal is the Opel Insignia( I love the US media. Before the Regal came out in the US, they went over to Europe and drove it and they loved it. Then they drive it on US shores, and all of a sudden they start panning it? ).
That'll be the marshmallows they use to replace the springs to make it a little softer for the yanks. :D
it wasn't a bad car.
It wasn't. You really don't want to think what today's hatches would be like if that car never existed. It really was that good. And its impact really was that great.
In typical bad Ford fashion
In typical Ford U.S. fashion you mean, fortunately, the profit making arm of Ford, i.e. the european division, produced the even better Mk2. ;)
I think that's probably accurate, general apathy on all sides really isn't it.
By way of a postscript, it's worth pointing out that today's safety and environmental regulations make it more difficult to make a car frugal, small and light than it was when Alec Issigonis designed the Mini.
Indeed, I think you've also inadvertently described the perfect engineering challenge that todays manufacturers really should be embracing, but instead seem so reticent to take up. The most remarkable thing about the original Mini, wasn't its size, it wasn't its cost� it was the whole. And in that respect alone, I cannot think of one car today that is really in anyway comparable whatsoever.
True, and that's a shame, because brand image often matters than a car's actual merits. If the new Jetta is a turd, people will still buy it because the VW badge has cachet here that GM does not, at least in the realm of small cars.
It's entirely possible to turn a brand around of course, as VW demonstrated with �koda, it's only 15 years ago that �koda was still the punchline to almost every joke.
The problem is Chevrolet is in a somewhat unique position in many respects here, it's a known brand, but by name only, usually as the carrier of good ol' boys... to a levy of course, when I think of a Chevy it's either something bright pink, with chrome� lots of chrome, or a pickup truck, not the rebadging of dreadful Daewoo cars. I suspect I'm not alone on that one.
And therein lies the problem. That and the Spark of course.
I'm not going to stand up too much for GM, I've never held a high opinion of most of their products, but I have reasonably read good reviews of the Cruze and I hope they bring the diesel here.
The Cruze is entirely inoffensive, and does the job entirely adequately by all accounts, as it should, after all it does have 4 wheels and an engine. Autocar likened it to the old Mk2 Seat Toledo saloon, and that's probably an apt comparison. Vanilla. Much like the rest of Vauxhall/Opel/Holden/Buick ranges etc actually. And that is a big problem for GM. A very big problem. One that almost sank the ship in the first place in fact. The captain might be different, but there's still no one at the helm.
the Daewoo -> Chevrolet re-branding in europe has been more or less the best business move GM has made perhaps in the last decade
Doesn't say much really does it. ;)
I think you highlight the real issue in the rest of your post. But it doesn't just affect Opel. And that is perhaps GM's biggest problem of all.
which is in a contrast to the japanese/korean brands which in europe over the last few years streamlined a lot: nearly all brands stopped offering premium sedans or upper market offerings and rather concentrated on SUVs/ crossovers and small offroaders and small minivans, compacts or small hatchbacks
It's not really streamlining when you have something like 6 suv/off-roaders in your range a'la Nissan is it? ;)
GM is doing reasonably well in Asia, and they have placed much of their small-car design duties into the capable hands of the Koreans - a wise move in my opinion.
Not if the Spark is anything to go by. Fortunately as the i10 proves, being Korean isn't the problem. ;)
I think blame can be put on both sides.
Yeah, but mainly GM for getting themselves into such a god almighty mess in the first place. ;)
The Buick Regal is the Opel Insignia( I love the US media. Before the Regal came out in the US, they went over to Europe and drove it and they loved it. Then they drive it on US shores, and all of a sudden they start panning it? ).
That'll be the marshmallows they use to replace the springs to make it a little softer for the yanks. :D
it wasn't a bad car.
It wasn't. You really don't want to think what today's hatches would be like if that car never existed. It really was that good. And its impact really was that great.
In typical bad Ford fashion
In typical Ford U.S. fashion you mean, fortunately, the profit making arm of Ford, i.e. the european division, produced the even better Mk2. ;)
7on
Feb 21, 01:51 PM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5170/5322249630_f13fec39df_z.jpg
WHAT is that orange contraption? MUST acquire!
WHAT is that orange contraption? MUST acquire!
twoodcc
Feb 19, 09:59 PM
Good question, I'm not sure at this point. Lets me see; the MP was doing a bigadv unit every ~46 hrs which would yield maybe ~25k per day, the i7 isn't doing so well with 3 gpu and win 7 on it, I would guess maybe 2k/day or less. It doesn't seem to slow down the gpu's fortunately.
I wanted to ask you about oc'ing the i7, every time I tried to bump it up it started freezing or crashing, I have a water cooler on it which seems to do a really good job. I've just left it at stock but would like to try to get it higher sometime. I don't have any experience with oc'ing as I mostly stick with mac and Linux which don't have the tools/ability for oc'ing like windows does.
ok. now do you have the 2.66 or 2.26 mac pro octo?
for the i7, what most people do is run linux in a VM and do the bigadv units while also doing gpu units. but i wouldn't do this unless you're running at least around 3.3 ghz. i'm running around 3.6 ghz i think, and i have 2 gpu's going on mine. it slows down the bigadv units, but the gpu's make up for it.
how are you trying to overclock now? just in the bios? that's basically just how i do it - in the bios. but that will depend on your motherboard
I wanted to ask you about oc'ing the i7, every time I tried to bump it up it started freezing or crashing, I have a water cooler on it which seems to do a really good job. I've just left it at stock but would like to try to get it higher sometime. I don't have any experience with oc'ing as I mostly stick with mac and Linux which don't have the tools/ability for oc'ing like windows does.
ok. now do you have the 2.66 or 2.26 mac pro octo?
for the i7, what most people do is run linux in a VM and do the bigadv units while also doing gpu units. but i wouldn't do this unless you're running at least around 3.3 ghz. i'm running around 3.6 ghz i think, and i have 2 gpu's going on mine. it slows down the bigadv units, but the gpu's make up for it.
how are you trying to overclock now? just in the bios? that's basically just how i do it - in the bios. but that will depend on your motherboard
iJohnHenry
Mar 19, 04:33 PM
All about the oil... "protect the citizens" is a perfect excuse. Sadly, because this is what it should be about.
I will accept this 'protection'.
Most of the players in this drama do not directly gain anything from Libyan oil.
I will accept this 'protection'.
Most of the players in this drama do not directly gain anything from Libyan oil.
Zwhaler
Aug 21, 12:35 PM
Yeah, if the Zune can't even play videos, what makes anyone think it will be even nearly competable with the next iPod? I think that either the Zune is gonna suck, or they are gonna surprise with an honestly good music player.
ssspinball
Sep 14, 10:17 AM
I'm a satisfied iPhone 4 owner, but what CR is doing is perfectly reasonable/logical. Kudos to them.
chadgroove
Aug 24, 08:57 PM
Movies are on their way to iTunes...
And Front Row is getting refreshed in Leopard...
I'm still in disbelief that the Mac mini will become a set-top box, but all the pieces are starting to come together.
Yeah I'm getting that feeling too. Its a tingly feeling.. but that feeling might be loss of circulation due sitting at a new MacPro at work all day. I'm pretty sure I didn't stand up for a good 6 hours today. Can't be good.
It'd be cool to see some kinda of upgraded/dedicated graphics, a bigger 7200rpm HD, and 2 firewire ports. Maybe some built in or adapter based outputs for dual dvi? Alot depends on the ammount of vram it will have.
I kinda hoped they'd do a significant modification based on or similar to the mini for a media hub. SOmethign not much bigger, but specifically a media hub, that can be a decent Mac, not the other way around.
And Front Row is getting refreshed in Leopard...
I'm still in disbelief that the Mac mini will become a set-top box, but all the pieces are starting to come together.
Yeah I'm getting that feeling too. Its a tingly feeling.. but that feeling might be loss of circulation due sitting at a new MacPro at work all day. I'm pretty sure I didn't stand up for a good 6 hours today. Can't be good.
It'd be cool to see some kinda of upgraded/dedicated graphics, a bigger 7200rpm HD, and 2 firewire ports. Maybe some built in or adapter based outputs for dual dvi? Alot depends on the ammount of vram it will have.
I kinda hoped they'd do a significant modification based on or similar to the mini for a media hub. SOmethign not much bigger, but specifically a media hub, that can be a decent Mac, not the other way around.
Xavier
Nov 27, 02:40 PM
I wouldn't mind this happening! I have been stuck with a 15 inch (not even wide screen) for a long time, but being low budget, haven't been able to afford the models I wanted. I hope that Apple produces this
ErikCLDR
Feb 7, 04:32 PM
2005 LR3 SE, mountain road in Northern New Hampshire
Very nice, how's yours holding up?
My parents have '07 LR3 and an '07 Range Rover sport. Both have been very reliable aside from some software issues in the RRS that were quickly sorted out. There have been a couple little things but overall they have been much more reliable than our previous Discoveries.
We had an LR4 as a loaner and it's like night and day over the LR3. The interior is significantly nicer and the ride is smoother.
Very nice, how's yours holding up?
My parents have '07 LR3 and an '07 Range Rover sport. Both have been very reliable aside from some software issues in the RRS that were quickly sorted out. There have been a couple little things but overall they have been much more reliable than our previous Discoveries.
We had an LR4 as a loaner and it's like night and day over the LR3. The interior is significantly nicer and the ride is smoother.
omegaphil6
Feb 8, 06:57 AM
http://www.jimmirehman.com/charger/Blackedout.jpg
2008 Dodge Charger SE
http://www.jimmirehman.com/charger/Signaturev1.jpg
2008 Dodge Charger SE
http://www.jimmirehman.com/charger/Signaturev1.jpg
Ugg
Mar 24, 12:05 PM
This is kinda funny actually.
"Our country wasn't founded on a "God" principle. well lets see
July 4, 1776:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"
Creator.....not god then who was it? Those atoms that just happened to bond together gave us rights?
Oh and again.
"he separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them"
So you'll argue. Separation of Church & State.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
Respecting: admire (someone or something) deeply, as a result of their abilities, qualities, or achievements
Congress shall make no law in favor of one religion, or prohibiting one. Lets see Christianity isn't the only belief system that frowns upon homosexuality so that kills your one religion statement.
Now to the app. I don't see how its offensive. Would an anti-smoker app be offensive? Diligent smokers sign a petition with a minority of iOS users because it discriminates again their lifestyle.
Apple holds the right to take it down, but I don't think it should have been.
No trying to substitute facts and history with your own beliefs. Homosexuality is not natural, there is no natural way for reproduction which is the whole purpose of sex or the "reproduction system" as it may be classified.
Primordial soup was my creator. I don't feel any compelling need to trumpet that fact though. Insecurity definitely seems to be one of the afflictions that the rabidly religious suffer from.
If it occurs in nature, it's natural. There are tons of critters out there that engage in same sex behavior, they're natural, why shouldn't human same sex behavior not be natural?
"Our country wasn't founded on a "God" principle. well lets see
July 4, 1776:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"
Creator.....not god then who was it? Those atoms that just happened to bond together gave us rights?
Oh and again.
"he separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them"
So you'll argue. Separation of Church & State.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
Respecting: admire (someone or something) deeply, as a result of their abilities, qualities, or achievements
Congress shall make no law in favor of one religion, or prohibiting one. Lets see Christianity isn't the only belief system that frowns upon homosexuality so that kills your one religion statement.
Now to the app. I don't see how its offensive. Would an anti-smoker app be offensive? Diligent smokers sign a petition with a minority of iOS users because it discriminates again their lifestyle.
Apple holds the right to take it down, but I don't think it should have been.
No trying to substitute facts and history with your own beliefs. Homosexuality is not natural, there is no natural way for reproduction which is the whole purpose of sex or the "reproduction system" as it may be classified.
Primordial soup was my creator. I don't feel any compelling need to trumpet that fact though. Insecurity definitely seems to be one of the afflictions that the rabidly religious suffer from.
If it occurs in nature, it's natural. There are tons of critters out there that engage in same sex behavior, they're natural, why shouldn't human same sex behavior not be natural?
0 comments:
Post a Comment